农村外出务工人员承包地处置方式的区域差异与影响因素——基于社会融入视角

doi:10.31497/zrzyxb.20220211

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

我国农村外出务工人员保有相当规模的承包地,如何高效集约利用是农业现代化的基础。利用流动人口卫生计生动态监测数据,在分析省域承包地处置方式差异的基础上,以其社会融入水平为切入点,分析其承包地处置决策的影响因素。研究发现：（1）粮食主产区承包地流转已具一定规模,但撂荒在全国也有相当比例,显性撂荒呈“西南高、东北低”的空间格局,农村外出务工人员承包地处置方式的集聚特征与其流动目的地社会融入水平存在一定程度的关联性;（2）社会融入水平的提升会显著降低农村外出务工人员的自耕意愿,易于形成亲朋耕种、流转等承包地处置决策,但是,撂荒的概率也会随之增加;（3）地方土地流转政策尚不足以将农村外出务工人员转移经营权的意愿完全转化为亲朋耕种、流转等行为,依然有较高概率显性或隐性撂荒。针对这些问题,流出地与流动目的地的政策应统筹考虑。一方面提升社会服务水平,降低农村外出务工人员生计风险;另一方面应积极引导其将承包地流转,避免撂荒造成耕地资源浪费。

关键词: 农村外出务工人员, 承包地, 社会融入, 区域差异

Abstract:

Rural migrant workers in China still have a considerable amount of contracted land. Using it efficiently and intensively and solving the separation of farmer and land is an essential basis for realizing agricultural modernization and ensuring food security. The paper uses data based on the disposal methods of contracted land of rural migrant workers from the National Survey on Health and Family Planning Dynamics of the Mobile Populations to analyze the factors influencing the disposal decisions of contracted land of rural migrant workers based on the differences in the disposal methods of contracted land in provincial-level areas and the level of their social inclusion in mobile destinations as the entry point. The study found that: (1) The transfer of contracted land in the central grain-producing regions has reached an absolute scale, but there is a considerable proportion of abandonment in the country, and the spatial pattern of explicit abandonment is "high in the southwest, but low in the northeast." Besides, the self-farming and hidden abandoned accumulation of characteristics are not obvious, with a certain degree of universality. (2) The increase in age, family income, and social inclusion will significantly reduce the willingness of rural migrant workers to cultivate their land and easily make a decision to dispose of contracted land such as cultivation and transfer to their friends and relatives. As a result, the probability of abandonment will also increase. (3) There is a particular coupling between institutional social inclusion and mobility destinations, with rural migrant workers to the eastern region tending to cultivate land themselves and those to the central and northeastern regions tending to transfer or abandon their land. The research perspective of social inclusion confirms the social security value of contracted land for rural migrant workers, and enhancing their social inclusion level can help the policy practice of separation of three rights. However, the current local land transfer policies are not sufficient to fully transform the willingness of rural migrant workers to transfer their management rights into farming and transferring by their friends and relatives. Rural migrant workers still have a high probability of abandoning their land explicitly or implicitly after their non-farm employment and life stabilization. As a result, the rural migrant workers' origin and destination governments should be considered in an integrated manner to lower the level of urban social services and reduce their livelihood risk concerns on the one hand, and actively guide them to transfer their contracted land to avoid wasting land resources due to abandonment on the other.

Key words: rural migrant workers, contracted land, social inclusion, regional differences

刘春卉, 聂文静, 赵晓彤, 沈维志. 农村外出务工人员承包地处置方式的区域差异与影响因素——基于社会融入视角[J]. 自然资源学报, 2022, 37(2): 424-439.

LIU Chun-hui, NIE Wen-jing, ZHAO Xiao-tong, SHEN Wei-zhi. Regional differences and influencing factors in the contracted land use patterns for rural migrant workers: A perspective of social inclusion[J]. JOURNAL OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 2022, 37(2): 424-439.

图/表 8

图1

表1

变量的选择与定义

类型	变量		定义	均值	标准差
因变量	承包地处置方式	$y$	自耕=1;亲朋耕种=2;流转=3;显性撂荒=4;隐性撂荒=5;种树及其他=6	2.08	1.38
自变量	控制变量	$x 1$	年龄	39.89	19.54
		$x 2$	受教育程度,小学及以下=1,初中=2,高中=3;大专及以上=4	2.25	0.91
		$x 3$	土地耕种是否缺乏劳动力（是=1,否=0）	0.24	0.43
		$x 4$	家庭年收入/元,取对数	11.14	0.53
		$x 5$	承包地面积/亩	2.05	5.49
			是否独自流动（是=1,否=0）	0.44	0.50
		$x 7$	流动距离,市内跨县=1,省内跨市=2,跨省=3	2.32	0.78
	经济融合	$x 8$	在本地没有参加各种社会社会医疗保险和自有住房=0;两者有一项=1;两者都有=2	0.44	0.63
	文化融合	$x 9$	我喜欢我现在居住的城市/地方	16.07	2.46
			我关注我现在居住城市/地方的变化
			我很愿意融入本地人当中,成为其中一员
			我觉得本地人愿意接受我成为其中一员
			我觉得我已经是本地人了

表1

图2

图3

表2

Z检验结果

承包地处理方式	$Moran' s I$	Z得分
自耕	0.005821	0.455393
亲朋耕种	0.202119^**	2.500959
流转	0.213485^***	2.684775
显性撂荒	0.245888^***	3.223482
隐性撂荒	0.151142	1.957721
种树及其他	0.316983^***	3.877764

表2

表3

承包地处置方式的多值Logit模型回归系数（自耕为参照组）

	亲朋耕种	流转	显性撂荒	隐性撂荒	种树及其他
$x 1$	0.048^***(0.002)	0.045^***(0.002)	0.026^***(0.002)	0.024^***(0.002)	0.050^***(0.004)
$x 2$	-0.126^***(0.018)	-0.024(0.021)	-0.301^***(0.029)	-0.168^***(0.026)	-0.138^***(0.049)
$x 3$	-0.393^***(0.032)	-0.757^***(0.042)	0.154^***(0.046)	0.067(0.043)	-0.475^***(0.090)
$x 4$	0.229^***(0.027)	0.370^***(0.031)	0.075^*(0.043)	0.037(0.039)	0.250^***(0.071)
$x 5$	-0.022^***(0.005)	0.017^***(0.003)	-0.010(0.007)	-0.025^***(0.007)	-0.008(0.011)
$x 6$	-0.292^***(0.028)	-0.305^***(0.033)	-0.245^***(0.044)	-0.177^***(0.040)	-0.139^*(0.074)
$x 7$	-0.023(0.018)	-0.021(0.021)	-0.138^***(0.028)	0.097^***(0.026)	-0.131^***(0.047)
	0.120^***(0.023)	0.137^***(0.027)	0.114^***(0.037)	0.189^***(0.033)	0.084(0.176.062)
$x 9$	0.028^***(0.006)	0.024^***(0.007)	-0.014(0.009)	-0.006(0.008)	0.003(0.822.015)
cons	-5.278^***(0.317)	-7.315^***(0.368)	-2.693^***(0.500)	-2.931^***(0.452)	-7.264^***(0.844)

表3

表4

承包地处置方式的流动目的地效应（以自耕和西部地区为参照）

	亲朋耕种	流转	显性撂荒	隐性撂荒	种树及其他
$x 1$	0.047^***(0.002)	0.044^***(0.002)	0.026^***(0.002)	0.023^***(0.002)	0.049^***(0.004)
$x 2$	-0.124^***(0.018)	-0.023(0.021)	-0.291^***(0.029)	-0.161^***(0.026)	-0.135^***(0.048)
$x 3$	-0.426^***(0.033)	-0.711^***(0.042)	0.071(0.046)	0.031(0.043)	-0.558^***(0.090)
$x 4$	0.328^***(0.028)	0.418^***(0.032)	0.180^***(0.044)	0.107^***(0.040)	0.366^***(0.073)
$x 5$	-0.032^***(0.005)	0.010^***(0.003)	-0.014^**(0.007)	-0.032^***(0.008)	-0.011(0.011)
$x 6$	-0.294^***(0.028)	-0.269^***(0.033)	-0.272^***(0.045)	-0.183^***(0.040)	-0.169^**(0.075)
$x 7$	0.094^***(0.020)	0.073^***(0.024)	-0.053^*(0.030)	0.144^***(0.029)	0.005(0.051)
$x 8$	0.122^***(0.023)	0.125^***(0.027)	0.131^***(0.037)	0.191^***(0.033)	0.102^*(0.062)
$x 9$	0.017^***(0.006)	0.018^***(0.007)	-0.025^***(0.009)	-0.014^*(0.008)	-0.009(0.015)
E	-0.555^***(0.034)	-0.014(0.041)	-0.702^***(0.051)	-0.419^***(0.047)	-0.807^***(0.087)
M	-0.169^***(0.042)	0.371^***(0.050)	-0.603^***(0.069)	-0.431^***(0.066)	-0.341^***(0.108)
EN	0.0003(0.076)	1.126^***(0.072)	-3.412^***(0.503)	-0.288^***(0.123)	-2.637^***(0.583)
cons	-6.130^***(0.323)	-8.053^***(0.376)	-3.399^***(0.508)	-3.379^***(0.459)	-8.174^***(0.856)

表4

表5

承包地处置方式的地区效应与社会融入的交互分析（以自耕和西部地区为参照）

	亲朋耕种	流转	显性撂荒	隐性撂荒	种树及其他
$x 1$	0.047^***(0.002)	0.044^***(0.002)	0.026^***(0.002)	0.024^***(0.002)	0.049^***(0.004)
$x 2$	-0.121^***(0.018)	-0.022(0.021)	-0.285^***(0.029)	-0.160^***(0.026)	-0.132^***(0.048)
$x 3$	-0.426^***(0.033)	-0.712^***(0.042)	0.071(0.046)	0.029(0.043)	-0.560^***(0.090)
$x 4$	0.328^***(0.028)	0.417^***(0.032)	0.177^***(0.044)	0.106^***(0.040)	0.365^***(0.073)
$x 5$	-0.032^***(0.005)	0.011^***(0.003)	-0.014^**(0.007)	-0.032^***(0.008)	-0.011(0.011)
$x 6$	-0.292^***(0.028)	-0.267^***(0.033)	-0.266^***(0.045)	-0.182^***(0.040)	-0.166^**(0.075)
$x 7$	0.092^***(0.020)	0.074^***(0.024)	-0.059^**(0.030)	0.144^***(0.029)	0.005(0.051)
$x 8$	0.158^***(0.036)	0.138^***(0.048)	0.247^***(0.051)	0.154^***(0.052)	0.089(0.088)
$x 9$	0.017^***(0.006)	0.018^***(0.007)	-0.025^***(0.009)	-0.014^*(0.008)	-0.009(0.015)
E	-0.504^***(0.040)	0.033(0.050)	-0.549^***(0.060)	-0.433^***(0.056)	-0.761^***(0.102)
M	-0.213^***(0.051)	0.233^***(0.063)	-0.697^***(0.086)	-0.474^***(0.080)	-0.516^***(0.136)
EN	-0.012(0.098)	1.186^***(0.091)	-2.991^***(0.566)	-0.495^***(0.172)	-2.753^***(0.790)
E-i	-0.114^**(0.048)	-0.105^*(0.059)	-0.373^***(0.076)	0.030(0.067)	-0.107(0.127)
M-i	0.095(0.065)	0.277***(0.074)	0.187^*(0.104)	0.102(0.102)	0.362^**(0.159)
EN-i	0.009(0.109)	-0.106(0.106)	-1.053(1.028)	0.315^*(0.169)	0.190(0.804)
cons	-6.142^***(0.324)	-8.064^***(0.377)	-3.418^***(0.510)	-3.362^***(0.459)	-8.169^***(0.858)

表5

参考文献 49

[1]	黄滢冰, 南卓铜, 徐启恒 , 等. 珠三角典型地区耕地流失特征及机制分析: 以1988年—2013年快速城市化的东莞市为例. 世界地理研究, 2017,26(5):44-55.
	[ HUANG Y B, NAN Z T, XU Q H, et al. Characteristics and driving forces of the arable land loss in Dongguan. World Reginal Studies, 2017,25(5):44-55.]
[2]	LIU Y, YANG Y, LI Y, et al. Conversion from rural settlements and arable land under rapid urbanization in Beijing during 1985-2010. Journal of Rural Studies, 2017,51:141-150.
[3]	GAO X, XU A, LIU L, et al. Understanding rural housing abandonment in China's rapid urbanization. Habitat International, 2017,67:13-21.
[4]	CHEN M, GONG Y, LU D, et al. Build a people-oriented urbanization: China's new-type urbanization dream and Anhui model. Land Use Policy, 2019,80:1-9.
[5]	CHENG L, BROWN G, LIU Y, et al. An evaluation of contemporary China's land use policy: The link policy: A case study from Ezhou, Hubei province. Land Use Policy, 2020,91:104423.
[6]	高欣, 张安录, 李超 . 社会保障, 非农收入预期与宅基地退出决策行为: 基于上海市金山区、松江区等经济发达地区的实证分析. 中国土地科学, 2016,30(6):89-97.
	[ GAO X, ZHANG A L, LI C. Social security, expectation of the non-agricultural income and decisionmaking behavior of the rural residential land exit: Based on the empirical research on developed area of Jinshan district and Songjiang district in Shanghai. China Land Sciences, 2016,30(6):89-97.]
[7]	张兰, 冯淑怡, 陆华良 , 等. 农地不同流转去向对转出户收入的影响: 来自江苏省的证据. 中国农村观察, 2017, ( 5):116-129.
	[ ZHANG L, FENG S Y, LU H L, et al. The impacts of farmland lease to tenants of different types on lessor household income: Evidence from Jiangsu province. China Rural Survey, 2017, ( 5):116-129.]
[8]	王海娟 . 集体所有制视野下承包地退出制度及其改革困境研究. 经济学家, 2020, ( 7):76-84.
	[ WANG H J. Study on the withdrawal system and reform dilemma of contracted land from the perspective of collective ownership. Economist, 2020, ( 7):76-84.]
[9]	王海娟, 胡守庚 . 土地细碎化与土地流转市场的优化路径研究. 学术研究, 2019, ( 7):45-52.
	[ WANG H J, HU S G. Fragmented land and the optimization path of farmland circulation market. Academic Research, 2019, ( 7):45-52.]
[10]	张勇 . 农户退出土地承包经营权的意愿、补偿诉求及政策建议. 中州学刊, 2020, ( 6):39-45.
	[ ZHANG Y. The willingness, compensation demands and policy suggestions of farmers' withdrawal from land contract management right. Academic Journal of Zhongzhou, 2020, ( 6):39-45.]
[11]	纪月清, 熊皛白, 刘华 . 土地细碎化与农村劳动力转移研究. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016,26(8):105-115.
	[ JI Y Q, XIONG X B, LIU H. Land fragmentation and the transfer of rural labor. China Population, Resources and Development, 2016,26(8):105-115.]
[12]	郭贝贝, 方叶林, 周寅康 . 农户尺度的耕地撂荒影响因素及空间分异. 资源科学, 2020,42(4):696-709.
	[ GUO B B, FANG Y L, ZHOU Y K. Influencing factors and spatial differentiation of cultivated land abandonment at the household scale. Resources Science, 2020,42(4):696-709.]
[13]	王亚辉, 李秀彬, 辛良杰 , 等. 中国土地流转的区域差异及其影响因素: 基于2003—2013年农村固定观察点数据. 地理学报, 2018,73(3):487-502.
	[ WANG Y H, LI X B, XIN L J, et al. Regional differences of land circulation in China and its drivers: Based on 2003-2013 rural fixed observation points data. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018,73(3):487-502.]
[14]	王倩, 邱俊杰, 余劲 . 移民搬迁是否加剧了山区耕地撂荒: 基于陕南三市1578户农户面板数据. 自然资源学报, 2019,34(7):1376-1390.
	[ WANG Q, QIU J J, YU J. Does rural resettlement accelerate farmland abandonment in mountainous areas: A case study of 1578 households in Southern Shaanxi. Journal of Natural Resources, 2019,34(7):1376-1390.]
[15]	张亚丽, 白云丽, 甄霖 , 等. 新农保能促进农户土地流转吗: 基于CHARLS三期面板数据. 自然资源学报, 2019,34(5):1016-1026.
	[ ZHANG Y L, BAI Y L, ZHEN L, et al. Could the new rural social pension insurance promote farmers' land transfer: Based on three waves panel data of CHARLS. Journal of Natural Resources, 2019,34(5):1016-1026.]
[16]	朱兰兰, 蔡银莺 . 农户家庭生计禀赋对农地流转的影响: 以湖北省不同类型功能区为例. 自然资源学报, 2016,31(9):1526-1539.
	[ ZHU L L, CAI Y Y. The impacts of farmer households' livelihood endowment on farmland transfer: Cases in different types of functional areas of Hubei province. Journal of Natural Resources, 2016,31(9):1526-1539.]
[17]	张亚丽, 白云丽, 辛良杰 . 耕地质量与土地流转行为关系研究. 资源科学, 2019,41(6):1102-1110.
	[ ZHANG Y L, BAI Y L, XIN L J. Relationships between cultivated land quality and land transfer behaviors at the plot scale. Resources Science, 2019,41(6):1102-1110.]
[18]	陈学法 . “三化”并进的核心: 农民市民化. 经济问题, 2013, ( 10):4-8.
	[ CHEN X F. The citizenization of peasants: The core of the simultaneous development of industrialization, urbanization and agricultural modernization. On Economic Problems, 2013, ( 10):4-8.]
[19]	辛毅, 宫伟文, 赵雅斐 . “显性市民化”与“隐性市民化”对农民土地转出行为的影响. 资源科学, 2020,42(5):894-906.
	[ XIN Y, GONG W W, ZHAO Y F. Influence of "explicit citizenship" and "implicit citizenshipon" farmers' land transfer behavior. Resources Science, 2020,42(5):894-906.]
[20]	HUANG X, HUANG X, HE Y, et al. Assessment of livelihood vulnerability of land-lost farmers in urban fringes: A case study of Xi'an, China. Habitat International, 2017,59:1-9.
[21]	WANG J, XIN L, WANG Y. How farmers' non-agricultural employment affects rural land circulation in China?. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2020,30(3):378-400.
[22]	CHEN H, WANG X. Exploring the relationship between rural village characteristics and Chinese return migrants' participation in farming: Path dependence in rural employment. Cities, 2019,88:136-143.
[23]	SU B, LI Y, LI L, et al. How does nonfarm employment stability influence farmers' farmland transfer decisions? Implications for China's land use policy. Land Use Policy, 2018,74:66-72.
[24]	WANG W W, FAN C C. Migrant workers' integration in urban China: Experiences in employment, social adaptation, and self-identity. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 2012,53(6):731-749.
[25]	DROUHOT L G, NEE V. Assimilation and the second generation in Europe and America: Blending and segregating social dynamics between immigrants and natives. Annual Review of Sociology, 2019,45(1):177-199.
[26]	GORDON M M. Assimilation in American Life: The Role of Race, Religion, and National Origins. Oxford University Press on Demand, 1964.
[27]	PORTES A, ZHOU M I N. The New Second Generation: Segmented assimilation and its variants. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1993,530(1):74-96.
[28]	LI Z, WU F. Residential satisfaction in China's informal settlements: A case study of Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou. Urban Geography, 2013,34(7):923-949.
[29]	HUANG G, XUE D, GUO Y, et al. Constrained voluntary informalisation: Analysing motivations of self-employed migrant workers in an urban village, Guangzhou. Cities, 2020,105:102760.
[30]	MA Y, HOU X, HUANG J, et al. Educational inequality and achievement disparity: An empirical study of migrant children in China. Children and Youth Services Review, 2018,87:145-153.
[31]	ZHAO P. An 'unceasing war' on land development on the urban fringe of Beijing: A case study of gated informal housing communities. Cities, 2017,60:139-146.
[32]	WANG M, NING Y. The social integration of migrants in Shanghai's urban villages. China Review, 2016,16(3):93-120.
[33]	LIU C Y, CHEN J, LI H. Linking migrant enclave residence to employment in urban China: The case of Shanghai. Journal of Urban Affairs, 2019,41(2):189-205.
[34]	ZHAO L, LIU S, ZHANG W. New trends in internal migration in China: Profiles of the new-generation migrants. China & World Economy, 2018,26(1):18-41.
[35]	LIN S, WU F, LI Z. Social integration of migrants across Chinese neighbourhoods. Geoforum, 2020,112:118-128.
[36]	WATSON A. Social security for China's migrant workers: Providing for old age. Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, 2009,38(4):85-115.
[37]	CHEN Y, TAN Y, ZHANG Q. Rural migrants' participation in old-age insurance: A case study of the inter-provincial migrant workers from Sichuan, China. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment, 2017,15(2):120-131.
[38]	王亚辉, 李秀彬, 辛良杰 , 等. 耕地资产社会保障功能的空间分异研究: 不同农业类型区的比较. 地理科学进展, 2020,39(9):1473-1484.
	[ WANG Y H, LI X B, XIN L J, et al. Spatial differentiation of social security function of cultivated land assets: Comparison of different agricultural regions. Progress in Geography, 2020,39(9):1473-1484.]
[39]	WANG Y, LI X, HE H, et al. How reliable are cultivated land assets as social security for Chinese farmers?. Land Use Policy, 2020,90:104318.
[40]	CHEN C, FAN C C. China's hukou puzzle: Why don't rural migrants want urban hukou?. China Review, 2016,16(3):9-39.
[41]	CHEN C, FAN C C. Rural-urban circularity in China: Analysis of longitudinal surveys in Anhui, 1980-2009. Geoforum, 2018,93:97-104.
[42]	TANG S, HAO P. The return intentions of China's rural migrants: A study of Nanjing and Suzhou. Journal of Urban Affairs, 2019,41(3):354-371.
[43]	LIU L, GAO X, ZHUANG J, et al. Evaluating the lifestyle impact of China's rural housing land consolidation with locational big data: A study of Chengdu. Land Use Policy, 2020,96:104623.
[44]	RIGG J. Land, farming, livelihoods, and poverty: Rethinking the links in the Rural South. World Development, 2006,34(1):180-202.
[45]	HUANG X, ZHAO B, LIU Y, et al. Belonging to a place: An analysis of the perceptions of rural-to-urban migrants in China. Geographical Review, 2020,110(3):406-424.
[46]	XIE Y, JIANG Q. Land arrangements for rural-urban migrant workers in China: Findings from Jiangsu province. Land Use Policy, 2016,50:262-267.
[47]	刘成武, 李秀彬 . 农地边际化的表现特征及其诊断标准. 地理科学进展, 2005,24(2):106-113.
	[ LIU C W, LI X B. The character and diagnostic criterion for marginisation of the arable land. Progress in Geography, 2005,24(2):106-113.]
[48]	MOHABIR N, JIANG Y, MA R. Chinese floating migrants: Rural-urban migrant labourers' intentions to stay or return. Habitat International, 2017,60:101-110.
[49]	徐延辉, 龚紫钰 . 社会质量与农民工的市民化. 经济学家, 2019, ( 7):90-100.
	[ XU Y H, GONG Z Y. Social quality and the citizenization of migrant workers. Economist, 2019, ( 7):90-100.]